Latest news with #InformationTechnologyandInnovationFoundation
New York Post
a day ago
- Business
- New York Post
Don't fear the AI reaper — jobs panic is way off base
ChatGPT is coming for your job. That's the fear about the rapid advances in artificial intelligence. In a headline the other day, Axios warned of a 'white-collar bloodbath.' Advertisement The CEO of the artificial intelligence firm Anthropic told the publication that AI could destroy half of all entry-level white-collar jobs in the next one to five years and drive the unemployment rate up to 10% or 20% — or roughly Great Depression levels. This sounds dire, but we've been here before. In the 1930s, John Maynard Keynes thought that labor-saving devices were 'outrunning the pace at which we can find new uses for labor.' Advertisement Analysts thought the same thing in the 1960s, when President John F. Kennedy warned 'the automation problem is as important as any we face' — and in our era, too. If a prediction has been consistently wrong, it doesn't necessarily mean that it will forever be wrong. Still, we shouldn't have much confidence in the same alarmism, repeated for the same reasons. If technological advance was really a net killer of jobs, the labor market should have been in decline since the invention of the wheel. Advertisement Instead, we live in a time of technological marvels, and the unemployment rate is 4.2%. Rob Atkinson of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation points out that the average unemployment rate in the United States hasn't changed much over the last century, despite productivity — the ability to produce more with the same inputs — increasing by almost 10 times. Technology increases productivity, driving down costs and making it possible to invest and spend on other things, creating new jobs that replace the old. This is the process of a society becoming wealthier, and it's why nations that innovate are better off than those that don't. Advertisement The rise of personal computers collapsed the demand for typists and word processors. These positions were often held by women. Did this decimate the economic prospects of women in America? No — they got different, and frequently better, jobs. Spreadsheets drastically reduced the demand for bookkeepers and accounting clerks. Did this end the profession of accounting? No — there was an increase in more sophisticated accounting roles. Advertisement The job market has never been stuck in amber. The MIT economist David Autor co-authored a study that found the majority of current jobs are in occupational categories that arose since 1940. It's true that artificial intelligence is projected to affect white-collar jobs — computer programming, consulting, law and the like — more than prior waves of technological change. But these kind of jobs shouldn't be immune from the effects of automation any more than factory work has been. Advertisement AI will end up augmenting many jobs — helping workers become more efficient — and there will be a limit to how much it can encroach on human work. It's hard to imagine, say, Meta ever giving over its legal representation in an antitrust case to artificial intelligence. Lawyers handling such a case will, however, rely on AI for more and more support, diminishing the need for junior lawyers. This will be a significant disruption for the legal profession, yet legal services will also become cheaper and more widely available, in a benefit to everyone else. Advertisement There's no doubt that the changes wrought by technology can be painful, and it's possible that artificial intelligence eventually gets so good at so many tasks that people have no ready recourse to new, better jobs, as has always happened in the past. The potential upside, though, is vast. After strong productivity growth for about a decade beginning in the mid-1990s, we shifted into a lower gear in the mid-2000s. Advertisement It will be a boon if artificial intelligence puts us on a better trajectory. An era of high productivity growth will, among other things, make it easier to deal with the budget deficit and the fiscal strain of retiring Baby Boomers. Like anything else, AI will have its downsides, but it's not an inherent threat — any more than computers or the internet were. Twitter: @RichLowry
Miami Herald
4 days ago
- Automotive
- Miami Herald
Joe Rogan Says China ‘On Verge of Passing' US in ‘Many Areas'
Podcaster Joe Rogan has said China is "on the verge of passing" the United States in "many areas" such as drones and electric cars. Rogan, one of the world's most-listened-to podcasters, was discussing global affairs with comedian Jimmy Carr in a Joe Rogan Experience episode uploaded on May 23. His comments reflect a broader debate over the shifting global balance of power, as the U.S. and its allies navigate a world increasingly defined by competition with China. On top of this, global dynamics are shifting under Donald Trump's presidency, with concerns about opportunities for Beijing to woo U.S. allies in the face of Trump's tariffs and rhetoric about places like Greenland and the Panama Canal. Carr was talking about the American constitution, how it gives people agency and "the flourishing that's come out of it." "Look at what it's achieved," he said. "Imagine if something like that happens in China—imagine—in our lifetime that they go with a different system." He went on to compare China to a "covers band" saying it "has its own version of Facebook and its own version of Google." "What is it about America that allows this entrepreneurial spirit, that allows Silicon Valley to happen?" Carr asked. Rogan said: "Well they've got a very interesting approach because they still have a very entrepreneurial spirit as well. They've got a weird sort of merging of communism and capitalism. Like it's state-run capitalism." "But they still have insane innovation," he continued. "Like China's technological innovation is probably greater than ours—in a lot of areas. In the areas of electrical vehicles for sure. In the areas of drones for sure." Rogan went on to discuss China's "spectacular drone capabilities" and electric cars "you'd have no idea you don't follow these obscure car review people online that review Chinese electric cars." "Insane technology inside the vehicles, like spectacular-looking cars," Rogan said. "They're on the verge of passing us in many areas because there's a lot of regulation in regards to drone technology in particular in this country." What People Are Saying Donald Trump made similar comments about China and electric vehicles before the 2024 election:"China's eating our lunch right now," Trump said while criticizing what he considered a lack of tariffs imposed on China by former President Joe Biden. "We're losing," he said later talking about electric vehicles. "They're all gonna be made in China," he added. Robert D. Atkinson, founder of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a public policy think tank, wrote last September: "There may be no more important question for the West's competitive position in advanced industries than whether China is becoming a rival innovator. While the evidence suggests it hasn't yet taken the overall lead, it has pulled ahead in certain areas, and in many others Chinese firms will likely equal or surpass Western firms within a decade or so." The growing rivalry between the U.S. and China is likely to remain a central issue in global affairs, with potential flashpoints in trade, technology and geopolitics. It remains to be seen how Trump's tariff war and his changes to regulations in the United States will play into this. Related Articles Joe Rogan Ripped Over Bad Habit on PodcastJoe Rogan's Sabrina Carpenter Birthday Cake Goes ViralJoe Rogan's Aaron Rodgers Interview Sparks AngerJoe Rogan Called Out Over Uber Claim on Podcast-'You Didn't Mumble' 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
The Hill
15-04-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Trump's tech tariff confusion
Tech companies breathed a sigh of relief late last week when the Trump administration revealed electronics would be exempt from the 'reciprocal' tariffs. But by the end of the weekend, President Trump signaled many of the same products will still be subject to expected sector-based tariffs. The dizzying tariff changes are driving uncertainty for the technology industry, which is being forced to make manufacturing and supply chain decisions based on evolving goalposts. 'It's creating an awful lot of chaos at the moment. A lot of uncertainty,' said Rob Handfield, a professor of supply chain management at North Carolina State University. The state of play of Trump's trade war changed a number of times over the past month, though the past two weeks saw some of the most drastic changes when it comes to the tech sector. Last Friday, guidance posted by Customs and Border Protection, which collects duties on imports, revealed about 20 products would be excluded from the tariffs, including: smartphones, computers, routers and semiconductor chips. The move was quickly celebrated by those in the tech industry and consumers hoping to avoid paying higher prices for electronics. But this was cut short two days later when Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick clarified the exemption is only a temporary measure. The White House confirmed it will open a Section 232 investigation into electronics imports, which would serve as the grounds for any tariffs on semiconductors. The fluctuating messages are putting various technology companies in a tight spot as they weigh adjusting their protocol based on circumstances that could change at any moment. 'Companies cherish stability, predictability, certainty in the business environment and that applies not just to trade policy, but institutionally, programmatically, regulatorily, etc.,' Stephen Ezell, vice president for global innovation policy at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation told The Hill.
Boston Globe
14-04-2025
- Business
- Boston Globe
It's the end of Kendall Square as we know it. What if biotech never bounces back?
But when he was laid off in the summer of 2024, it didn't feel like it was enough. He felt financially stressed. He heard that hiring managers received Advertisement What we're witnessing may be a remaking of biotech — surprising even to those in the industry. After five months of searching, Albert ultimately found a job at a small Boston-based biotech, where he focuses on cancer research. But In Massachusetts, biotech has been an important driver of jobs and wealth for decades, with Kendall Square at the epicenter of that growth. In 2024, the state had more than 140,000 jobs in the life sciences, Advertisement America has seen entire industries slip away before, notes Sandra Barbosu, associate director of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a nonpartisan think tank in Washington. Her recent report, ' 'I think it is actively happening,' said Isaac Stoner, chief executive of Boston-based Octagon Therapeutics. 'When an industry goes extinct or faces this existential moment, it causes broad economic pain for the region for a while. This happened when we lost our leadership position in computing in the late eighties and early nineties. It was maybe a 15-year period where there wasn't an industry to step in there and fill the void.' Certainly, over the last few years, we've seen Cambridge-based Biogen, for example, has had multiple rounds of Advertisement The Biogen headquarters in Cambridge. Vanessa Leroy/Bloomberg So where are the jobs going? In a word, China. (Though there are also jobs heading to other countries, including India.) And with every passing year, companies outsource more of their lab work to lower-cost countries. That means that many traditional jobs in labs — from research chemists to process technicians, quality control specialists to associate scientists — are evaporating. Some of these jobs require specialized undergraduate training; others require master's or doctoral degrees. Predictably, the number of drugs in development in China has surged. In 2014, Chinese companies had fewer than 500 drugs in development, a far cry from the nearly 6,000 drugs that US companies had in development that year, Fast forward a decade. By 2024, China had experienced massive growth, boasting more than 6,000 drugs in development. Meanwhile, the United States peaked at more than 9,000 drugs in development in 2022 and has dipped slightly since then. In March, the pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca — which is working on opening a 'The drugs that we believe will be approved in the next five to 10 years, a larger proportion of them are going to be coming from China,' said George Voren, vice president of founder strategy and operations at venture firm 'Meaning the discovery of them is coming from China. And not necessarily the biotech labs in Cambridge.' Advertisement A key reason that American companies work with Chinese labs is that they have scientists who are on staff and ready to go. That means, Voren said, a company 'can immediately get work started and make progress,' rather than 'building your own lab and spending six months to hire people.' (Though, as we've seen with other industries, there may be concerns about the safety of intellectual property.) Multiple people I spoke with said these trends will be exacerbated by the Trump administration's efforts to Opler said some biotech investors have historically believed that Boston sits at the epicenter of innovation, and China just copies our breakthroughs. The thinking goes like this, he said: 'Here in Boston, we're next to The Broad, we're next to MIT, we've got Harvard.' But after traveling to China in March, Opler concluded: 'That view is no longer accurate. In a very short period of time, you're seeing Chinese companies move at lightning speed into areas of high innovation in the biopharmaceutical industry.' Opler argues that biotech remains a global growth industry — making him less concerned about overall employment, though the skills needed to secure a job may shift. Still, he said, companies face 'an existential threat' if they don't become more efficient, meaning they may have to outsource certain jobs simply to survive. Losing jobs does not mean that venture capitalists or executives will necessarily leave Massachusetts. But while we might retain those who make millions of dollars a year, we risk permanently losing the legions of jobs that pay $100,000, $200,000, or $300,000 a year. Advertisement Some in the industry worry that we face the prospect of Kendall Square operating with a fraction of the folks who work there now. Lane Turner/Globe Staff So what happens to the Boston area if biotech jobs largely slip away? Stoner said he's seeing signs of 'a white-collar recession, where these people with very specialized degrees and very specialized training are having a hard time finding their next position. I run a big networking group, and I'm just seeing the number of folks there job-hunting going up and up and up. It makes me uncomfortable.' Apart from job losses, the character of Cambridge, Somerville, and other biotech hotspots may shift. Amarante points out that many landlords can't reduce prices enough to make a deal with prospective tenants — doing so would violate the terms of their own financial obligations. And he believes that will force more and more buildings into foreclosure. One problem for landlords, Amarante said, is that when potential renters tour large lab buildings that are empty or nearly empty, they realize 'it can create a post-apocalyptic experience for their team, and no one wants that.' If large swaths of lab space remain empty, Stoner worries about 'decay of various neighborhoods. And that drives down real estate prices. And it just kind of has this slow rolling effect.' Advertisement I asked Stoner if anything could be done to turn the tide in biotech. He said the United States would have to turn to 'brutal protectionist measures.' wouldn't be enough. It would have to be 'things like the FDA saying: 'We are not going to review your drug if the data was generated in China.'' Opler said making pharmaceuticals in China can prove tremendously cost-effective. In a conversation with a CEO who makes an ingredient for aspirin, Opler asked if he was worried about And for lots of companies, that's the bottom line. 'If I'm a top 10 or top 20 global pharma company,' Stoner said, 'I don't care where the innovation comes from at the end of the day. I have no incentive to make sure this cluster in Kendall Square remains the envy of the bio world.' Follow Kara Miller
